October DA Reinforces United for Change allegation (Complaint #21) that the UFT/Unity Caucus Shuts UFC Out at DA - Unity Denies DA Plan

Sunday, October 23, 2022

The UFC Committee alleges that the UFT has violated the LMRDA with a range of conduct relating to the conduct of the Delegate Assembly, the UFT’s representative legislative body. These allegations are broadly divided into three categories: (a) alleged violations of Roberts Rules; (b) procedural inadequacy; and (c) procedural changes made in conjunction with the election... UFT Election Complaint #21

For decades some Unity Caucus people have been telling us how Unity and the leadership prepped for Delegate Assemblies through what they call their "Speakers Bureau". People get assigned roles. They even rehearse. They held two rehearsals for a recent DA so Mulgrew could get it right. Mulgrew even has seating plans. People are set up to ask certain questions that allow Mulgrew to expand on his already way too long opening report. They have designated plants to speak on leadership backed resos and people known as "call the question" plants to end debates. One former Unity told me a clue is when Leroy Barr removes his glasses. Which makes this report Leroy gave at the Oct. 3 Ex Bd hilarious:

UFT President Michael Mulgrew does not determine who is called on based on caucus affiliation...Concerning the allegation that no delegate not affiliated with the UC has been permitted to present a resolution and no UFC candidate member has been recognized during the new motion period of the Delegate Assembly, this is false. While the UFT does not track caucus affiliation for attendees or speakers at Delegate Assemblies, UFT rejection of UFC Complaint #21 - LOL

While I don't expect the Department of Labor or the AFT to rule against the UFT on the way they run the Delegate Assembly, we need to keep pointing their behavior. Last year's - a UFT election year - the behavior by Unity was the worst as Mulgrew shut out voices of the opposition at last years' DAs after the opposition had won or came close on some resos. 

Unity shuts out opposition voices by controlling the 10 minute New Motion period by inserting its own motions and making it look like they are random. 

Ex Bd UFC member Nick Bacon exposed the continuing behavior in his report on the Oct. DA:

No time for opposition: 

Mulgrew called on one opposition member all night – H.S. executive board member, Ilona Nanay (MORE), who asked a good question (and got a bad answer) on changes to the city council administrative code. It was no accident that Mulgrew called on a known opposition member during the question period, but not during the new motions period. During a question period, it’s easy for Mulgrew to regain control of the room. He can spend lots of time answering a short question, and making it clear that his perspective is the right perspective. 

During a new motion, opposition has far more space to convince the audience. Mulgrew knows that, so we haven’t been called on since last November, 2021 to raise one (and that’s when I was technically still a member of his Unity caucus). It’s also worth noting how obvious it was that Mulgrew knew who he was picking in advance. One of the people he called on, Maggie Joyce, is someone he calls on frequently to raise new motions. She is a familiar Unity face to him, often present at UFT functions. Another of the people he called on was raising a motion he noted before it was even raised (on migrant children).

Nick points out how Unity prevented UFC from presenting a strong healthcare reso to protect the members (rejected in a strict party vote at the UFT Ex Bd - Oct. 3: 

Our healthcare reso didn’t stand a chance. We didn’t even get to the business of motions on 10/12’s agenda. We lost all that to the most brainwashing filibuster Mulgrew has ever given. I’ll give my same advice again – if you want to see diverse union perspectives, come to executive board meetings where you have any chance of actually seeing them.

Unity put two "message" resos on the agenda - on immigrants and support for Iranian women - and watch them attack us for calling them out on this as an attack on the substance of the resos - not true - they could have been added as special business and not taken away from the normal 10 minute new motions. 

This tactic is intentional and happens time and again when they are threatened with a strong oppo reso and we will raise this tactic with the Department of Labor, though I don't think they will get what we are talking about.

Leadership sponsored resos are presented to the Ex bd and then put on the regular agenda of the DA. The ten minute time had been used by the opposition for decades to raise new motions. So especially since Mulgrew took over the UFT, Unity has coopted this time period to raise "late" resos, often handed out unlabeled as to sponsors. Now I understand that stuff may come up last minute -- so my suggestion is to allow them to do this but not count it against the 10 minutes. And if Mulgrew doesn't filibuster for an hour this would be easy.

Adding to the hilarity are the examples they cite of calling on UFC candidates at times before UFC even existed. The funniest was this:

At the November 17, 2021 Delegate Assembly, eventual UFC Executive Board candidate Nick Bacon made a motion regarding potential health care plan changes, which was voted on and defeated;

Nick, who did not become a candidate for UFC until January 2022, pointed out at the Exec Board meeting he was still in Unity in November 2021. In fact, my guess is that Nick was turned off to Unity due to their behavior at the DA. In fact, over the past 25 years, a number of people who were neutral delegates were pissed off enough at the DA to move toward the opposition.

And on this one from the UFT report:

At the November 17, 2021 Delegate Assembly, eventual UFC Executive Board candidate and member of the Educators of NYC (EONYC) caucus Daniel Alicea had a motion listed on the agenda as a special order of business, regarding the UFT’s position towards mayoral control of New York City public schools, which Mr. Alicea withdrew from consideration;

Daniel, who a year before the election was still fairly neutral about Unity - in fact he voted for Unity in the 2019 election - tried to get a mayoral control reso on the agenda in the spring of 2021 but found himself thwarted at every turn and withdrew his reso after its relevance had expired. That they used this example at a time when UFC did not exist and Daniel was not associated with the opposition - yet - makes their response even more of a farce.

In my opinion the thwarting of his attempt to get a discussion going on mayoral control at the DA was what helped open his eyes. When Daniel raised the point that many of the speakers at DAs are UFT employees on the payroll Unity went ballistic on him - he became public enemy #1.

Below is the complete section of the UFT report:

Complaint #21 – The Allegations Do Not Demonstrate Violations Of The LMRDA

The UFC Committee alleges that the UFT has violated the LMRDA with a range of conduct relating to the conduct of the Delegate Assembly, the UFT’s representative legislative body. These allegations are broadly divided into three categories: (a) alleged violations of Roberts Rules; (b) procedural inadequacy; and (c) procedural changes made in conjunction with the election.

Many of the UFC Committee’s allegations are not, in fact, election complaints, as they concern general issues of union governance rather than issues specifically related to the 2022 UFT election. To the extent that these allegations may relate to or have affected the election, they are addressed below.

Concerning the length of the President’s Report, the distribution of time to various business within the timeframe of a given Delegate Assembly is set in each meeting agenda and varies depending on the needs of the UFT at the given time. The President’s Report has varied in length significantly over the years, depending on the information which needs to be reported out to the delegates: when there are more and more complex issues for the President to explain, the President’s Report will take up more of the time of the Delegate Assembly. There is no allegation that the content of the reports concerned topics that were inappropriate or not typical of the President’s Report.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the President’s Report has tended to be longer, due to the frequent policy changes impacting public employees, and the importance of clear and detailed explanations for the health of the UFT’s members. While delegates may be frustrated at the amount of time taken up by the President’s Report, this is unrelated to the UFT election, and there is no violation. Accordingly, this allegation should be rejected.

Concerning the allegation that no delegate not affiliated with the UC has been permitted to present a resolution and no UFC candidate member has been recognized during the new motion period of the Delegate Assembly, this is false. While the UFT does not track caucus affiliation for attendees or speakers at Delegate Assemblies, the UFT is aware of at least the following six (6) examples of resolutions presented by non-UC members and voted on by the Delegate Assembly:

• At the November 17, 2021 Delegate Assembly, eventual UFC Executive Board candidate Nick Bacon made a motion regarding potential health care plan changes, which was voted on and defeated;

• At the November 17, 2021 Delegate Assembly, eventual UFC Executive Board candidate and member of the Educators of NYC (EONYC) caucus Daniel Alicea had a motion listed on the agenda as a special order of business, regarding the UFT’s position towards mayoral control of New York City public schools, which Mr. Alicea withdrew from consideration;

• At the January 19, 2022 Delegate Assembly, Mike Stivers, an active member of the Movement of Rank and File Educators (MORE) caucus, made a motion for an amendment to a resolution on member engagement—seeking to release contract survey results to the public—which was voted on and defeated;

• At the January 19, 2022 Delegate Assembly, Ryan Bruckenthal, an active member of the MORE caucus, made a motion to suspend the rules to vote on all resolutions, which was voted on and defeated;

• At the April 13, 2022 Delegate Assembly, UFC candidate and active member of the MORE caucus Peter Lamphere made a motion to extend the motion period, which was voted on and defeated; and

• At the May 25, 2022 Delegate Assembly, UFC Executive Board candidate Olivia Swisher proposed three amendments to the decorum resolution, which were voted on and defeated.

  While it is true that the adoption of all resolutions has somewhat slowed at Delegate Assembly meetings, this is a result of procedural changes to voting adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic when electronic and remote participation and voting was added. The new voting process is more inclusive but also takes up more time during the meetings, slowing the process. This change is unrelated to the UFT election.

  Finally, UFT President Michael Mulgrew does not determine who is called on based on caucus affiliation (nor is he always presiding over each part of the meeting). There are approximately 3,500 delegates entitled to attend Delegate Assembly meetings. Prior to the pandemic, between 700 and 1,000 delegates attended each Delegate Assembly in person. Since the beginning of the pandemic, between 200 and 300 delegates are regularly physically present at the meetings, with many more attending virtually. The suggestion that President Mulgrew could possibly be aware of the caucus affiliation of each Delegate who seeks to speak is not reasonable. As such, there is no violation. Accordingly, this allegation should be rejected.